This quote by the American historian Daniel Boorstin is becoming increasingly relevant also in medical research. Nowadays, it seems to be much more common than one or two decades ago that authors confuse cohort studies with case-control studies, cumulative incidence with incidence density, hazard ratios with odds ratios, etc., etc. It is paradoxical that the increased accessibility of information with Internet (and the easiness with which the definition of methodological terms can be checked) comes, in Rumsfeldian terms, with a reduction of the known unknown and a corresponding growth of the unknown unknown.
More fromĀ Where the rubber meets the road
The commonest mistake
October 13, 2019
While statistical significance often is mistaken as an indication of practical importance or scientific relevance, an even greater mistake is to believe that statistical non-significance indicates equivalence or "no difference". It doesn't. Statistical non-significance reflects uncertainty, which perhaps can be considered as an indication of a too small sample size.
...
Uncertainty
November 27, 2019
Humans are generally unable to handle uncertainty rationally. Finding significance in random stimuli and interpreting random phenomena as mostly dangerous give a survival advantage that can explain some of the anxiety and superstition in today's society. In the history of science, uncertainty has not always been accepted. For example, questioning the church's scientific statements about the earth being the centre of the solar system rendered Galileo a death sentence in 1633. During the following...